The Watchtower Society of Jehovah's Witnesses

[Elijah John]

How can Jehovah's Witnesses be the "one true church" if they themselves make mistakes and revise their doctrine, dogma and practices?

Exhibit a) before the NWT (New World Translation) of the Bible was published, Jehovah's Witnesses used the American Standard Version (ASV). Both translations honor the name of Jehovah but there are stark differences.

The NWT is the only translation (that I know of) which has Jesus "impaled on a stake" instead of crucified on a cross, as virtually every other translation posits.

The first volume of the NWT was originally released in 1950.

How can JWs be the "only true church" if it was evolving, fallible and subject to revision?

And exhibit b) how can JWs be the only true church with dimly supported and strange doctrines such as the belief that Jesus was Michael the Archangel before the Nativity?

Exhibit c) How can the JWs be the only true church if they falsely predicted that Jesus would return in 1914?

And when that return did not materialized, they revised their prediction and now conveniently claim his return was "invisible".

"One true Church" or fringe sect?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 116 by benchwarmer]

I contacted them asking for a specific reason. Awaiting the reply.

Why would you have you have to do that? Surely you didn't make your statement before you had sufficient proof? And now when you were called up you are attempting to find something.

Or did you...

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 115 by American Deist]

There are prominent NT scholars that disagree with Metzger. So we can throw other people's opinions at each other all day. Most that disagree with the NWT of the Bible are those that support the trinity. It's always those scriptures they have a problem with and Metzger appears to be yet another bias critic.

[American Deist]

[Replying to post 121 by JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 122 by 2timothy316]


You guys just don't get it, do you? Do you think it is a massive conspiracy by most other denominations against the JWs?

Let me ask you this: why do you think the NWT is authoritative, knowing that the authors did not know Hebrew and Greek? Because the WTS says so?

Think of it like this analogy:

PhD's that know Hebrew and Greek = mathematicians that say 1+1 = 2.

The NWT authors that don't know Hebrew and Greek = non mathematicians that say 1+1 = 3.

The PhD's are like "what the heck are you talking about? That's just some made up nonsense!"

[benchwarmer]

[Replying to post 116 by benchwarmer]

I contacted them asking for a specific reason. Awaiting the reply.

Why would you have you have to do that? Surely you didn't make your statement before you had sufficient proof? And now when you were called up you are attempting to find something.

Or did you...

The irony is killing me.

[cough][JehovahsWitness opined]"I believe this is refering to the true religion (Jehovah's Witnesses)"[/cough]

Look, it's clear AD may have spoken with no direct evidence at hand, but at least rectification is under way. Too bad this wasn't the norm around here (attempting to correct/corroborate with evidence when called out)

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 121 by JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 122 by 2timothy316]


You guys just don't get it, do you? Do you think it is a massive conspiracy by most other denominations against the JWs?

No. They are misleading because they are mislead. Yet, you are only attacking the NWT and not like the NASB, which are both very similar. Why is that?

Let me ask you this: why do you think the NWT is authoritative, knowing that the authors did not know Hebrew and Greek? Because the WTS says so?

So, again please point out where you think the NWT is wrong. We only know of a few of the committee, the entire committee has not been released. We also don't know who they consulted. Witness are all over the world. Many have PhDs in things including language. Keeping the committee members a secret is not a JW only practice. For example, the jacket of the Reference Edition (1971) of the New American Standard Bible states: We have not used any scholars name for reference or recommendations because it is our belief Gods Word should stand on its merits. Just because the NASB doesn't tell us their committee members are we to assume they too did a bad job of translation?

Do you agree that God's Word should stand on it's merits? Where do you think that the NWT doesn't stand on it's merits? Do you even believe that the Bible is God's Word?

Think of it like this analogy:

PhD's that know Hebrew and Greek = mathematicians that say 1+1 = 2.

The NWT authors that don't know Hebrew and Greek = non mathematicians that say 1+1 = 3.

The PhD's are like "what the heck are you talking about? That's just some made up nonsense!"

This would work if you knew if the committee didn't consult any other Greek and Hebrew translators. All we know are some names of the committee. That doesn't make them the translators. After the textual basis started with another work, Biblia Hebraica.

But go ahead, please show us an example of where the NWT got it wrong.

[JehovahsWitness]

Look, it's clear AD may have spoken with no direct evidence at hand, but at least rectification is under way.

Yes he did, but don't be to hard on him. Notice the post quote right here >> ... << where he acknowledged his haste; that at least is admirable.


Let us be charitable.


JW

[OnceConvinced]

. I don't feed trolls.

Moderator Warning


Do not call other members on this site trolls.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[American Deist]

My apologies to 2Timothy for referring to him as a troll. I felt like he was baiting me with his replies and posting from an illogical position. Calling him out was unbecoming of me.

I have no desire to spend most of my time on this site within this one thread about the WTS and JWs. I have said my piece, and I will leave it at that. If anyone wants to know where I am coming from, a simple Google search will yield plenty of results as to why so many scholars look down upon the NWT.

I will point out that some of the JWs beliefs are actually spot on and biblical, such as annihilationism and the resurrection/judgment. I will cover that in another thread.

To answer one final question, as a deist I reject ALL holy books as being the divinely inspired, inerrant Word of God. They were written by humans, and every person on the planet makes mistakes...not to mention the Autographs do not exist and therefore no Bible can be proven to be the absolute truth.

For me, it is not about which translation is the genuine Word of God, but rather which translation most accurately reflects the Hebrew and Greek texts. The NWT fails in that regard. It is a highly paraphrased version.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 123 by American Deist]

Are you done? As Tim said feel free to produce an actual example where you feel the NWT is lacking and we will be happy to Adresse it or link you to were it has already been addressed.

Jehovahs Witnesses are not Translation bound and can use any Translation to defend our beliefs.

Have a good day,

JW

[2timothy316]

My apologies to 2Timothy for referring to him as a troll. I felt like he was baiting me with his replies and posting from an illogical position. Calling him out was unbecoming of me.

Apology accepted.

I have no desire to spend most of my time on this site within this one thread about the WTS and JWs. I have said my piece, and I will leave it at that. If anyone wants to know where I am coming from, a simple Google search will yield plenty of results as to why so many scholars look down upon the NWT.

A search on why so many look up to it will yield results as well.

I will point out that some of the JWs beliefs are actually spot on and biblical, such as annihilationism and the resurrection/judgment. I will cover that in another thread.

We can't take credit for coming up with that belief. (Ecc 9:5)

To answer one final question, as a deist I reject ALL holy books as being the divinely inspired, inerrant Word of God. They were written by humans, and every person on the planet makes mistakes...not to mention the Autographs do not exist and therefore no Bible can be proven to be the absolute truth.

From the way you have answered many of the questions here, I doubt it would matter if the Bible was first written in English and we still had the autographs. There is a parable in Luke 16:19-31 of rich man who apparently thought a lot of himself. He passed by a sickly and poor man at his gate often. In time they both died. Jesus when on to imagine if the rich man could speak from the grave. The rich man saw the sickly man standing by Abraham but between him and them was a huge chasm. The rich man couldn't reach the other side. The rich man, realizing he wouldn't be resurrected like Abraham and the sickly man because of his deeds in life he begs Abraham to send word to his family.

"Then he said, That being so, I ask you, father, to send him to the house of my father, for I have five brothers, in order that he may give them a thorough witness so that they will not also come into this place of torment. But Abraham said, They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to these. Then he said, No, indeed, father Abraham, but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent. But he said to him, If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead.

Do you notice who Jesus said they wouldn't listen to? Moses and the prophets. Imperfect men. He even says they wouldn't be persuaded if they got the message from a person raised from the dead. Should we be that type of person? Should we look at ourselves as the highest authority? Should we (figuratively) dress in purple and linen, enjoying yourself with magnificence while we by pass those we see as sickly and imperfect? Would it take a person from the dead with a Bible in their hand saying, 'this is the Word of God' convince us?

For me, it is not about which translation is the genuine Word of God, but rather which translation most accurately reflects the Hebrew and Greek texts. The NWT fails in that regard. It is a highly paraphrased version.

I keep asking for an example, but I see you are done with this thread now, so I guess it is easier to just walk away then backup your own accusations. As I am sure you are aware JWs are quite versed in the many Bible translations. We too know of the controversial scriptures. We too had to reconcile with why the NWT translates as it does. Guess what. We know all the answers as to why something is translated as it is in the NWT. Have you heard all of the answers already? If not then why not learn.